MSNBC Forced to Apologize After Egregiously Taking Quotes Out of Context

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

MSNBC host Thomas Roberts on Friday aired a portion of Vice President Joe Bidenís speech given at a plaque dedication remembering the Americans lost in the Benghazi terror attack and falsely claimed he was mourning ďchildren as the victims of gun violence.Ē Roberts was discussing Bidenís reported plans to make a second push for gun control after losing in the first round.

There are laws against libel and slander to protect individuals against deliberate and untruthful dissemination of information...

Should it be a crime to attempt to manipulate the political process by willfully broadcasting obvious lies?

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.

There are laws against libel and slander to protect individuals against deliberate and untruthful dissemination of information...

Should it be a crime to attempt to manipulate the political process by willfully broadcasting obvious lies?

Unfortunately, the right to free speech includes the right to be a lying sack of partisanship. The best way to deal with MSDNC is to expose them whenever possible and subject them to the ridicule that they have so often earned.

Unfortunately, the right to free speech includes the right to be a lying sack of partisanship. The best way to deal with MSDNC is to expose them whenever possible and subject them to the ridicule that they have so often earned.

True. Propaganda is as old as the hills. Both sides do it although the right isn't as grandiose about it as the left is.

True. Propaganda is as old as the hills. Both sides do it although the right isn't as grandiose about it as the left is.

Generally, the right has a harder time of it, because the media skews so thoroughly to the left. Even when someone on the right tells the truth, the leftist media is prepared to "fact-check" the truth out of existence. Remember Candy Crowley's defense of Obama during the presidential debates? When a liberal lies, the media parrots it, but when a conservative says something that isn't completely self-evident, the media pounces like a rabid pack of jackals (and even when a conservative says something that is completely self-evident, the media pounces, in fact, they pounce faster, because the self-evident facts are the most dangerous to their agenda). Relentlessly negative press tends to make Republicans less likely to try to scam the system, because they know that they will be caught, while relentlessly positive coverage manifests itself in a corrupt Democratic Party that knows that it will get away with anything.

Now apart from the fact that anyone born in 1912 would have been over 100 years old in 2012, what Lawrence O'Donnell failed to mention was that Mississippi didn't issue birth certificates to ANYONE until 1912.

So he was telling the truth, but he was telling the truth to imply a lie. And yes, Republicans do this with some regularity, even right here on this board. They'll say something true to imply a lie, and then do that "Who me? Where did I tell a lie?" routine.

Now apart from the fact that anyone born in 1912 would have been over 100 years old in 2012, what Lawrence O'Donnell failed to mention was that Mississippi didn't issue birth certificates to ANYONE until 1912.

So he was telling the truth, but he was telling the truth to imply a lie. And yes, Republicans do this with some regularity, even right here on this board. They'll say something true to imply a lie, and then do that "Who me? Where did I tell a lie?" routine.

And I'm sure you can proved evidence of what you claim?

Yeah...didn't think so.

Nova your defense of all things Liberal and your weak attempts to equivocate in order to justify the actions of your fellow Libtards is about as pathetic as MSNBC's ratings.

Now apart from the fact that anyone born in 1912 would have been over 100 years old in 2012, what Lawrence O'Donnell failed to mention was that Mississippi didn't issue birth certificates to ANYONE until 1912.

So he was telling the truth, but he was telling the truth to imply a lie. And yes, Republicans do this with some regularity, even right here on this board. They'll say something true to imply a lie, and then do that "Who me? Where did I tell a lie?" routine.

So, in order to prove that conservatives misrepresent the truth, you cite a progressive's misrepresentation of the truth as an example? Seriously?

Now apart from the fact that anyone born in 1912 would have been over 100 years old in 2012, what Lawrence O'Donnell failed to mention was that Mississippi didn't issue birth certificates to ANYONE until 1912.

So he was telling the truth, but he was telling the truth to imply a lie. And yes, Republicans do this with some regularity, even right here on this board. They'll say something true to imply a lie, and then do that "Who me? Where did I tell a lie?" routine.

Lawrence O'donnell? That man is a story fabricating douchebag. He wouldn't know what a fact check was if his life depended on it. I think he gets most of his information from the DUmp. He gets these fabricated stories, doesn't check the facts, and reports them as being true. He is the worst excuse for a supposed journalist I have ever seen.

Originally Posted by Odysseus

So, in order to prove that conservatives misrepresent the truth, you cite a progressive's misrepresentation of the truth as an example? Seriously?

So, in order to prove that conservatives misrepresent the truth, you cite a progressive's misrepresentation of the truth as an example? Seriously?

It's a typical leftist ploy. Listen to Alan Colmes and Kirsten Powers when O'Reilly has them on. As soon as the debate point is made, the first thing out of their mouths is "well, under Bush...". As I keep saying, these people are nothing but predictable.